[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: was Arcjet, now solid boosters

>From: "Tom Blubaugh" <mjrtom@home.com>

>> I'd rather trust the guys who do this for a living with my satellite money.
>I agree with you here. But this time I'm going to pay close attention and
see what
>kind of propultion/fuel system will be used before I contribute any more $
to a future program.
>This problem we had with AO-40 put a bad taste in my mouth and I hope they
never use that
>exact design of propultion/fuel system again. I think were very lucky to
still have a live bird
>considering what had happened on board.

Well, definitely that is wise! ;-)

But before you condemn this fuel you should understand that hypergolic
fuels are successfully used by "those" rocket engineers in many
professional missions.  I hear that cars sometime catch fire and
explode...doesn't mean that we should stop using gasoline fueled engines.

Certainly a thorough and open review of the events on AO-40 need
examination...and we should learn from the mistakes.  If at first you don't
succeed..."don't ever try it again"?

I'm fine with a phase-jj concept bird to get one launched quickly.  But a
high inclination Molyinya (sp?) orbit is pretty nice [AO-10/13].  You can
only get one with a "big" rocket ;-)


Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org